The New York Philharmonic Makes Its Choice

Jaap van Zweden leading the New York Philharmonic, in 2014.Photograph by Hiroyuki Ito/Getty

Yep, it’s Jaap. The rumor mill in the classical-music world had long intimated that the New York Philharmonic, in its search for a new music director, was leaning toward the Dutch conductor Jaap van Zweden (pronounced “Yahp van ZVAY-den”). The other name in circulation was that of Esa-Pekka Salonen, the Philharmonic’s current composer-in-residence. Last week, though, Salonen told Michael Cooper, of the New York Times, that he had withdrawn from consideration, so that he could focus on creative work. At a press conference this morning, the Philharmonic introduced van Zweden, who will take up his duties in 2018. He was in transit from Hong Kong, where he conducts the Hong Kong Philharmonic, to Dallas, where he leads the Dallas Symphony. He will simplify his schedule in order to make room for America’s oldest and testiest orchestra.

Some Philharmonic patrons might be a little mystified by this turn of events. Van Zweden is certainly in the upper tier of international maestros, and has appeared with most of the major orchestras. He has a brusque, cutting podium manner, the kind that gives clear signals to musicians and listeners alike. He is not, however, a marquee name, the kind that can fill a concert hall and cause a jump in subscriptions. Nor have his performances won universal praise. Last fall, in one of a slew of whither-the-Phil think pieces that have filled the New York musical press in the past year, I took a skeptical view of his recent account of Beethoven’s Fifth. The crowd that night was enthusiastic, however, and my fellow critic Zachary Woolfe reacted more warmly.

Van Zweden may yet turn out to be a happy choice. I’ve liked his work in the past—notably, a glowering Chicago Symphony concert that paired Shostakovich’s Eighth Symphony with John Luther Adams’s “Dark Waves”—and his programming in Dallas has been a shade more adventurous than that of most American music directors. After eight years of Alan Gilbert’s thoughtful, rounded, not always urgent performances, van Zweden’s peremptory style may come as a blast of fresh air.

Still, it’s a curious outcome. If the Philharmonic wanted a charismatic celebrity figure, as the behind-the-scenes chatter suggested, it would have made a stronger play for Salonen. With the recent death of Pierre Boulez, Salonen has emerged as perhaps the most potent creative force in contemporary classical music. He is prized not only for his conducting and composing but also for his cultivation of technology and his flair for communication. He would have joined a lineage of composer-conductors that includes Boulez, Bernstein, and Mahler. So it goes.

One also wonders whether an approach was made to the Milanese maestro Gianandrea Noseda, who has made gripping appearances in New York in recent years: Britten’s “War Requiem” with the London Symphony, “Prince Igor” at the Met, “William Tell” with forces from the Teatro Regio in Turin. Noseda would rank higher than van Zweden on many people’s lists. In a mildly startling development, it was announced earlier this month that Noseda would go to the National Symphony, which ranks higher than the New York Philharmonic on no one’s list. That coup shows how a canny administrator can affect the equation. The president of the Kennedy Center, where the National Symphony is based, is Deborah Rutter, who has a knack for getting what she wants. In her previous position, as the president of the Chicago Symphony, she reeled in Riccardo Muti, whom the Philharmonic had tried and failed to sign.

Other names were bandied about by journalists and music lovers: Simon Rattle, Riccardo Chailly, Michael Tilson Thomas, David Robertson, Marin Alsop. Most of these were improbable, for reasons that are worth spelling out. Rattle has never led the Philharmonic and seems to have no interest in doing so. Nicholas Kenyon, in his biography of Rattle, writes that the Philharmonic “was well known as a minefield for conductors, and Rattle was determined to steer clear of it.” The musicians have a history of reacting badly to conductors who are effusive, talkative, or prone to explication and speculation. Bernstein aside, the players have preferred terse, to-the-point types. This prejudice rules out more than a few significant figures. From the limited ranks of the available, the willing, the tolerated, and the marketable, van Zweden has emerged the victor.

The Gilbert era, which will end in the spring of 2017, has been the most intellectually lively in the recent history of the orchestra. The engagement of Salonen as composer-in-residence is typical of Gilbert’s spirit: unconcerned with being overshadowed, he has made his colleague a partner in an expansive, modern-minded vision. During a Messiaen week in March, Salonen will conduct the “Turangalîla Symphony,” while Gilbert will play the violin part in the “Quartet for the End of Time.” Later that month, Gilbert will present the local première of Salonen’s riotous choral-orchestral work “Karawane,” and in June, as part of the new-music Biennial, he will introduce a Salonen piece for orchestra. From week to week, Gilbert has fashioned programs that have news value and that add to the sum of knowledge. He has kept alive Boulez’s vision of a “musical life that is part of genuine culture.” Enjoy it while it lasts.